The Truth about Gladys Hammond

The below link brings you to a site that makes for interesting reading about the widely reported case of the animal rights campaigners who according to various reports where responsible (amongst all their other alleged crimes) for digging up a grave and removing the body of Gladys Hammond. An example HERE of the mainstream reporting of the case from the Guardian newspaper.

http://netcu.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/netcu-watch-the-truth-about-gladys-hammond/ The Daily Mail newspaper recently published a story that implicated animal rights campaigners being behind the sabotage of a well known brand of over the counter pain relief tablets. Heres what the newspaper said "Yesterday the Daily Mail reported that animal activists could be behind the sabotage operation with the intention of damaging Reckitt Benckiser. It is thought the company may have been targeted because it tests products on animals"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2030126/Nurofen-Plus-recall-Boots-packs-sabotaged-anti-psychotic-drugs.html#ixzz1WFKepo1A

No other reports ( that i'm aware of) mentions who is thought to be responsible for the sabotage.

Government Consultation on EC Directive

The Home Office HERE , is consulting on The European Council DIRECTIVE 2010/63/EU of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. The consultation will run for 12 weeks until 5 September 2011.

Report of the Science & Technology Committee

The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee Report into the UK Centre for Medical Research & Innovation (UKCMRI) HERE

The Science and Technology Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Government Office for Science and associated public bodies.

Exerts from the report:

10 Conclusions

164. We consider that the UK requires a Centre for Medical Research and Innovation. We agree with and commend the scientific vision for the UKCMRI.

165. Our predecessor Committee's estimation of the UKCMRI was correct: it is an exciting project which could bring significant benefits to life sciences in the UK and, indeed, to the world but it does carry a number of risks.

We have examined two areas which our predecessors considered needed careful monitoring: the management structure and the funding of UKCMRI.

166. However, we remain unconvinced that the location at Brill Place is the only suitable location and that the physical links described, i.e. face to face collaboration are as important or as likely as they have been described to us.

167. While we accept that the plans are now highly unlikely to change, we consider it is fair to say that the cost of construction is higher at St Pancras than any viable alternative site.

The combination of high land value and the construction challenges means that the cost of building the centre, before equipping and staffing it, will be the best part of £650 million. This high cost is being justified on the basis that by placing the Centre in central London it will create better physical links with other London based institutions. Whilst we see some logic in this, we remain unconvinced that, in these financially stringent times, the high cost of building the UKCMRI in central London outweighs the benefits of these links.

Rally Against the Lab 18 May 2011

Rally Against the Lab!

(It’s stupidly sited beside St Pancras Station)

As cuts bite deeper, the truth gets clearer: SUPERLAB = super WASTE + high RISK United Kingdom Centre for Medical Research and Innovation will cost £660 million- £220 million from government and take 6 years before research begins. THE MONEY SHOULD BE SPENT ON SCIENCE AND EDUCATION NOW!

 

Why move research from the world famous Medical Research Centre on 46 acres at Mill Hill (with a level 4 virus capacity) to the 3.6 acres at St Pancras where it can do less work (Level 3 plus) with no room for expansion??? It will risk terrorist attacks, disruption from demonstrations, and a possible spillage that could infect the local population and spread to Europe.

Meet at 6pm Wednesday May 18 in Purchese Street Open Space (corner of Midland Road and Brill Place NW1). Help us spread awareness of this reckless, wasteful project SPA (St Pancras and Somers Town Planning Action) 020 7387 4942 07967417859 stpanstplanningaction@gmail.com Join COALITION AGAINST THE LAB!

Scientists for Labour

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk/

 http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2010/04/labour-scientists-fail-to-declare.html

HOC Science & Technology Committee

HoC Science and Technology Committee

Meeting started on Wednesday 9 February at 9.26am ended at 11.18am

UK Centre for Medical Research and Innovation

Witnesses

1. Professor Malcolm Grant, President and Provost, University College London, Harpal Kumar, Chief Executive, Cancer Research UK, Professor Sir John Savill, Chief Executive, Medical Research Council, and Sir Mark Walport, Chief Executive, Wellcome Trust
2. Natalie Bennett, Chair, Rob Inglis, Press Officer, and Frankie Biney, local resident, St Pancras and Somers Town Planning Action

Click HERE for webcast of meeting

Call for an Inquiry

London Evening Standard 

  No 10 ‘interfered to push through £600m plan for virus superlab’ January 20, 2011

Mark Blunden 20 Jan 2011

Campaigners against a maximum security “superlab” in the heart of London are calling for a parliamentary inquiry claiming that there was political interference in the bidding process.

The UK Centre for Medical Research and Innovation, behind the British Library in St Pancras, will be capable of containing flu viruses, malaria, tuberculosis, cancer cells and HIV.

Residents living close to the centre are calling for an inquiry into the £600 million project after Cabinet Office emails, seen by the Standard, revealed that the previous government was keen to “make it happen” before the tendering process had closed.

They also claim Camden council failed to inform residents fully of the severity of the diseases to be tested at the 3.6 acre site and is stonewalling their questions.

Today, it can be revealed that in July 2007, Jeremy Heywood, a Cabinet Office civil servant, emailed officials, including the Department of Health and the Chief Scientific Officer, stating: “The PM (Gordon Brown) is very keen to make sure the government departments are properly co-ordinated on this project – and that if there is a consensus that this is indeed an exciting project, then we do what we can to make it happen.”

The email, released under the Freedom of Information Act, was sent the week before the first bids were due in and six weeks before the shortlist was finalised.

Other documents reveal that among 27 competing proposals for the site were a multi-faith centre and hundreds of affordable homes in a borough with 18,000 people on its housing waiting list. Both of these proposals complied with Camden’s brief for the site, but it is alleged the superlab initially did not.

Resident Robert Henderson, a retired civil servant, 63, said: “Camden went against their own original plan for a mixed-use development.

“There’s been political interference with the bidding process as well as the grave security issues. There should be a parliamentary inquiry because £250 million of public money is at stake.”

Camden council strongly denies there was any government influence over the tendering process.

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, approved the research centre on Friday, saying it would attract "the best scientific minds to the capital".

The consortium behind it includes the Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK and the Wellcome Trust. There is no suggestion of any wrong-doing over the tendering process.